[psyopsy]

Congrats! You've made your position unfalsifiable.

When the data consistently shows gaps widening as social strictures loosen, and your response is to blame an invisible, unmeasurable "conditioning," you aren't doing science at all. But you are insulating your belief from any possible counter-evidence.

[__alexs]

No I'm just clear that the current state of science makes it impossible to draw the conclusion that you are.

Note that this outcome goes both ways. We can neither confirm that biology is the main driver nor confirm that it isn't. Life is not as certain as you want it to be.

[psyopsy]

You started with “not well explained by biology.”

All of the evidence is solidly on one side, so you’ve retreated to “we can neither confirm nor deny.”

I guess that’s progress?

[__alexs]

Again, those statements are not contradictory.

[psyopsy]

They're not contradictory in a vacuum. But in this sequence, they show you're backpedaling. You opened with a firm claim, and when confronted with actual data, you retreated to 'we can't know.' Pretending that perfect certainty is required here is just a dodge.